Students' perspectives on the use of digital versus conventional dental impression techniques in orthodontics

Digital impression perception among dental students in Saudi Arabia: A cross-sectional study

INTRODUCTION

The use of digital dentistry is rapidly increasing in prosthodontics. However, most dental students are not familiar with applying digital technologies in dental clinics. Thus, the aim of the current study was to assess the perception of dental students at different educational years towards digital impressions in comparison to conventional impressions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A cross-sectional questionnaire-based study was conducted on various educational years of dental students in the College of Dentistry, Imam Abdulrahman Bin Faisal University, between February and April 2023. The students had performed at least one intraoral scan (Trios 3shape) and another conventional polyether impression for phantom casts/patients. The questionnaire assessed students' perceptions of digital impressions using a 5-point scale ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree. Mann-Whitney U and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to compare students' perceptions of digital impressions according to gender and educational year, respectively.

RESULTS

The study included 122 students. About 55% were females with a mean (SD) age = 22.51 (3.36). Most students thought that digital impressions are faster and more user-friendly compared to conventional impressions. Significantly more female students thought that the handpiece was too big for intraoral use (p = 0.04) and that the process of the software was time-consuming and complicated. In general, higher educational year students were more satisfied with the digital impressions than lower educational year students.

CONCLUSIONS

Digital impressions were perceived by most students as being faster and easier than conventional ones. However, male students and those with higher educational years showed better perception of digital impression.

A comparison study: The use of digital and conventional impression techniques in dental hygiene education

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES

The study aimed to assess the applicability of digital intraoral scanning in dental hygiene education and compare the quality, efficiency, and ease of use to conventional impression techniques.

METHODS

Twenty-eight first-year dental hygiene students (DH1) at UTHealth Houston School of Dentistry (UTSD) participated in this 2022 study. Each student participated in two 4-h lab sessions. Students took traditional alginate impressions and digital intraoral scans using Planmeca Romexis on standardized teeth during the first and second sessions. Both techniques were assessed by faculty for quality and efficiency using a standardized rubric. Participants completed a post-survey providing insight into their perceptions of both techniques and ease of use.

RESULTS

The study had 100% participation in the lab sessions and survey responses (N = 28). The results showed digital scanning produced a statistically higher quality product than conventional alginate impressions (p = 0.023). The study found no statistical difference in the efficiency between the two methods. The majority of students (82%) agreed that digital intraoral scanning was easy to use (p = 0.001), and 89% agreed they would use digital intraoral scanning in clinical courses to help with patient care (p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

In this study, dental hygiene students with limited clinical experience learned new technology and used it to produce quality impressions compared to the conventional technique, indicating the value of introducing digital dentistry early in dental hygiene education.

Comparative Analysis of the Comfort of Children and Adolescents in Digital and Conventional Full-Arch Impression Methods: A Crossover Randomized Trial

The aim of this study was to evaluate the comfort of children and adolescents with conventional full-arch dental impression methods compared to two intraoral scanners (iTeroTM and PrimescanTM).

METHODS

A monocentric, analytical, controlled crossover study was designed to compare conventional impression and digital impression with two intraoral scanners (iTeroTM and PrimescanTM) in children and teenagers. Patient comfort was evaluated using a 100 mm VAS scale adapted to Spanish and for children. A descriptive and analytical statistical method was conducted with a confidence level of 95% (p ≤ 0.05) and asymptotic or bilateral significance.

RESULTS

A total of 51 subjects were enrolled in the study (mean age = 12.35 years). Although the group of 10-14-year-olds was the most numerous, gender was equally distributed among the age groups. None of the variables on the VAS scale showed differences between the gender categories (p > 0.05). There were differences (p < 0.05) with respect to the age categories, as the middle adolescent group showed the worst general perception and total comfort during the conventional impression. Statistically significant differences were found between all VAS scale items and the three impression methods (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The digital impression technique is superior in terms of total comfort to the conventional alginate impression in children and adolescents.

[Forensic dentistry for identity verification. A survey at the state police level]

BACKGROUND

In Germany, the identification of unknown dead persons is the responsibility of the police. According to INTERPOL standards, primary (e.g., DNA, fingerprints, and teeth) and secondary (e.g., tattoos) characteristics are examined. Forensic dentistry is already used internationally as an efficient method. In this study, the approach of state police in Germany was analyzed. The methods used for identification, the role of forensic dentistry, the cooperation with dentists, and possible optimization approaches are investigated.

METHODS

By means of a digital questionnaire, police officers competent in all federal states for the discovery of unknown dead bodies were asked about identification methods and specifically about the use of forensic dentistry.

RESULTS

Eighty-five officers from at least 11 federal states participated in the survey. The procedure turned out to be department specific. In 72.6% of the cases, different characteristics are combined in the identification process, most frequently DNA with dental status (37.1%). DNA analysis is used most frequently. Of the respondents, 62.9% agreed that dental identification is used "often." The percentage of identifications using dental status is estimated to be 1.6-8.1%. For forensic dentistry, 19.4% have a fixed point of contact. A digital platform to contact dentists was estimated to be helpful by 56.5%.

DISCUSSION

Forensic dentistry is currently still lagging behind DNA analysis, which could change through increasing digitalization if, for example, ante-mortem data are more reliably available and platforms for interdisciplinary exchange are created.

Evaluating the effect of digital technology on the learning of orthodontic cephalometric measurement

Background: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of integrating digital technology into cephalometric measurement teaching. Methods: In total, 94 undergraduates of stomatology were recruited and randomly allocated to two groups. According to the cross-over design, both groups completed cephalometric measurements by the traditional hand-drawn method and digital technology (the Dolphin software) in different order. In the traditional hand-drawn method, students depicted the outline of the craniofacial anatomical structures on sulfuric transfer paper first, then marked the measurement points and completed the measurement of line spacings and angles; by digital technology, they marked the points in the software and adjust the automatically generated outlines of the structures to obtain the results. Two professional orthodontists were invited as instructors and their measurements were set as standards. An online questionnaire was also used to investigate students' attitudes toward digital technology being used in the cephalometric teaching process. Results: There were significant differences of students' measurements ( P 1-SNA<0.01, P 1-SNB=0.01 and P 1-L1-NB (mm)<0.01; SNA: sella-nasion-subspinale angle, SNB: sella-nasion-supramental angle, L1-NB (mm): the distance from the lower central incisor tip to the nasion-supramental plane) between the traditional method and digital technology. Besides, the results of most items by digital technology were closer to the standards than those by the traditional method, including five items with statistical significance ( P 2-SNB<0.05, P 2-L1-NB (mm)<0.01, P 2-FMA<0.05, P 2-FMIA<0.05, P 2-IMPA<0.01), while three items were the opposite ( P 2-SNA<0.05, P 2-ANB (mm)<0.01, P 2-NA-PA<0.01). The questionnaire showed more students preferred digital technology (33%) as a better teaching method than the traditional method (2%) and 72% of participants thought they had mastered 50-80% of cephalometric knowledge after the course. Conclusions: This study demonstrated effectiveness and acceptance of the course applying digital technology during the cephalometric teaching process.

Procedure Time and Students’ Perception Comparing Full Arch Digital Scans with Conventional Impressions: A Cross-Over Randomized Experimental Trial

Methods

Ninety-six dental students each prepared tooth #36 for an all-ceramic crown on typodont models and were then randomly assigned into either group A: performed digital scan first, or Group B: performed conventional impression first. Procedure time was recorded for both. Immediately following each procedure, students indicated their perceived procedure difficulty. After exposure to both techniques, they selected their preferred one.

Results

There was a statistically significant difference between the mean procedure time of both techniques (P < 0.0001), where students spent 663.76 ± 442.50 seconds to complete the conventional impression and 293.32 ± 181.49 seconds to complete the digital scan. Females were significantly faster in completing the conventional impression compared to males. On the contrary, male students were faster in digital scanning than female students. There were no carryover effects in the duration and the initially performed procedure. 76% (73 of 96) of participants preferred digital scanning with no statistical significance shown between the preferred and initially performed procedure. Participants perceived conventional impressions to be more difficult than digital scans. There was a weak positive correlation between the VAS score and the procedure time for the digital technique (R = 0.25) and a moderate positive correlation for the conventional technique (R = 0.45).

Conclusions

The digital technique was preferred and perceived as easier than the conventional among undergraduate dental students with no impression-making experience, suggesting their readiness for new technology uptake. However, no significant correlation was found between the initially performed procedure and preference.

Dental students' perspectives on three intraoral scanners and CAD/CAM systems before and after a pre-clinical elective course in digital dentistry

Background

Intraoral scanners (IOS) are gaining interest in Dentistry for their ability to capture digital impressions of the oral cavity. These digital impressions facilitate the fabrication of indirect restorations using CAD/CAM technology. This study aimed to describe an elective course given to predoctoral dental students on the topic of Digital Dentistry and assess their learning outcomes and system preferences.

Material and Methods

Three IOS were evaluated by eight students enrolled in a Digital Dentistry elective course. These systems included Emerald S (Planmeca), Cerec Omnicam (Denstply Sirona), and True Definition (3M/Midmark). After a literature review and a hands-on session were completed for each system, the students provided their perspectives on various factors such as ease of use, organization, and user-friendliness in a qualitative narrative of each system and quantitatively through a six-items survey.

Results

Survey data suggests that the student cohort showed higher levels of previous familiarity, user preference, and clinical confidence in the Cerec and Planmeca systems as opposed to the True Definition system. Qualitatively, the students felt CEREC was the more educationally useful system to learn and presented with more ease of use, functionality, and efficacy than the other two systems.

Conclusions

While each system proved to have its unique benefits and drawbacks, students’ attitudes towards the Planmeca and Cerec systems were generally positive, while True Definition’s evaluation was limited. Students appreciated their experiences throughout this elective, familiarizing themselves with various digital systems.

Key words:Digital Dentistry, Intraoral Scanners, CAD/CAM, Dental Education, Learning Curve.

The Potential of Digital Impression in Orthodontics

Background: Over the past 20 years, there have been many innovations in orthodontic diagnosis and therapy. Among the innovations, there is the taking of dental impressions (DIs). Dental impressions are the negative imprint of hard and soft tissues of one or both arches, and they allow a plaster model to be formed, i.e., a positive reproduction. Traditional dental impressions can be made of different materials, such as alginate, while digital impression is captured by an intra-oral scanner. Digital impression, despite the evident advantages, has not yet replaced the conventional impression. The aim of this study is to evaluate which dental impressions are the most used by dentists. For this purpose, we considered 120 questionnaires sent electronically to patients of different dental private practices from different countries, where the dentists can use both techniques. The results highlighted that the kind of impression adopted is very much influenced by the type of therapy and orthodontic devices used in the treatment. We can conclude that, despite the advent of digital technology, conventional impressions are still used for fixed devices, while digital impressions are more adopted for orthodontic customized devices and therapies with clear aligners, that are very widespread among adult patients.

Accuracy of the Intraoral Scanner for Detection of Tooth Wear

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this work was to study the accuracy of the intraoral scanner for detection of tooth wear in natural teeth by using micro-computed tomography (micro-CT) as a gold standard.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty premolars were prepared, fixed in acrylic blocks, and scanned with an intraoral scanner (iTero Element® 2) and micro-CT for baseline reference images before artificial tooth wear induction. The samples were then scrubbed with abrasive sandpaper 20 times and scanned with the intraoral scanner. They were then superimposed with the reference images utilising the "TimeLapse" feature of the scanner until the abraded area appeared yellow, indicating tooth surface loss in the 50-200 μm range. The same samples were then rescanned by micro-CT to measure the actual tooth surface loss. This procedure was repeated for the subsequent experimental tooth surface loss of 200-400 μm range (orange areas) and 400-750 μm range (red areas). The collected data were analysed for sensitivity, positive predictive value (PPV), and accuracy. Level of statistical significance was set at .05.

RESULTS

In the detection of experimental tooth surface loss, the specificity, PPV, and accuracy of the intraoral scanner were 98%, 98%, and 97%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The iTero® intraoral scanner can be recommended to be a suitable screening tool for tooth wear in routine dental practice.

Digital intraoral scanner devices: a validation study based on common evaluation criteria

Background

The evolution of intraoral scanners (IOSs) is rapid, and new IOSs appear on the market with different properties depending on the manufacturers. There is no uniform rating system based on a defined set of aspects that has reported in the literature that can be used to compare these devices. This validation study aimed to compare different IOSs based on objective and comprehensive parameters.

Methods

In this study, 12 different IOSs were examined. The IOSs that were tested in this study in order of their delivery included the 3Shape Trios 3 Pod®, Planmeca Emerald®, Straumann DWIO®, GC Aadva®, iTero Element 2®, CEREC Primescan®, Medit i500®, 3Shape Trios 4 Move®, Carestream CS3600®, 3Shape Trios 4 Pod®, Carestream CS3700®, and Planmeca Emerald S®. IOSs were evaluated in four different ways: (a)summary chart, (b)comparative assessment, (c)data based on in vitro measurements and (d)accuracy measurements. A scoring system was created to enable an objective rating of IOSs.

Results

The differences among IOSs were demonstrated in point scores (summary chart[max. 10 points] + weight of IOSs[max. 2.5 points] + circumference of IOSs[max. 2.5 points] + in vitro scanning time[max. 2.5 points] + pauses in data capture[max. 2.5 points] + accuracy[max. 10 points] = summary[max. 30 points]). Trios 4 Pod achieved the greatest cumulative score (23.37 points), furthermore it earned the highest points for summary chart and scanning speed. Regarding scanning continuity, the best-performing IOSs, which tied at identical point scores, were the Trios 3 and 4 Pod, Trios 4 Move, iTero Element 2, CS3600 and CS3700. The most accurate IOS was the CEREC Primescan, although it earned the lowest points of the comparative assessment (heaviest IOS). GC Aadva scored 5.73 points of a maximum of 30 points, which was the poorest result in this study.

Conclusion

The scoring system reflects the differences among IOS devices based on the evaluated objective parameters and can be used to help clinicians select the right IOS device. The new generations of IOSs have more special properties, and their accuracy is higher than the previous versions.

Trial registration The permission for this study was granted by University Ethics Committee of Semmelweis University (SE RKEB number:108/2019).

Intraoral Scanners in Orthodontics: A Critical Review

Background: The use of digital technology has exponentially increased over recent years. Intraoral scanners, especially, have gained traction within orthodontics. The objective of the present review is to investigate the available evidence to create an up-to-date presentation of various clinical aspects of intraoral scanners in orthodontics. Methods: Search without restrictions in seven databases (Pubmed, CENTRAL, Cochrane Reviews, Scopus, Web of Science, Clinical Trials, Proquest) since inception, and hand searching until October 2020, were conducted. Results: The majority of studies were either cross-over or parallel group studies. The accuracy and reproducibility of intraoral scanners, in comparison to conventional methods, were investigated in several studies, with controversial results. The duration of the procedure did not report any clear outcome in favor of any method. Patients seem to prefer intraoral scanning, even though numerous studies point out the importance of operators’ experience and skills. Conclusions: Despite the innovations that intraoral scanners have brought in orthodontic clinical practice, there are still some challenges and limitations in their use. The majority of existing limitations may be overcome with experience and good clinical skills. More high-quality studies need to be conducted so that clinicians can have a clear image of this new technology.

Dental students' preference and perception on intraoral scanning and impression making

BACKGROUND

To investigate the preference and perception on intraoral scanning and impression making among dental students.

METHODS

Final-year dental students from the 2019 and 2020 cohorts were invited to complete an online questionnaire via Google-Form. Their preference on the intraoral-scanning/impression making techniques and their perception on these techniques including the ease of defect identification, ease of infection control, need of chairside support, ease to master the technique as a beginner, efficiency in their hands and ease to handle the scanner software (yes/no) were collected. The results were analysed using McNemar tests and binary logistic regression test. All tests were performed at significance level α = 0.05.

RESULTS

Ninety-seven students participated in this study with a response rate of 96.0 %. Eighty-one students (83.5 %) have tried intraoral scanning on peers. Fifty-three (54.6 %) students preferred intraoral-scanning and were categorized as Pro-scanning group. Forty-four (45.4 %) students either preferred impression-making (n = 21) or not sure (n = 23) were categorized as Others. More than half of students in both groups felt that intraoral-scanning is easier to identify defect, easier in infection control and require less chairside support. Higher proportion of students in the Pro-scanning group felt that intraoral-scanning requires less chairside support, easier to master as a beginner, more efficient in their hands and they can deal well with the scanner software than that in Others (P < 0.05). Regression shown that students preferred a technique that they perceived is more efficient (P = 0.000).

CONCLUSIONS

While intraoral scanning has perceived advantages, many students still prefer impression making that works more efficient to them.

Clinical Evaluation of Resin Composite CAD/CAM Restorations Placed by Undergraduate Students

To evaluate the clinical outcomes of resin composite CAD/CAM restorations in a prospective cohort study, and to assess patient and operator satisfaction after restoration placement, 59 indirect resin composite were placed by supervised undergraduate students, of which 43 restorations were followed over a mean period of 28 months (14–44 months) and evaluated using USPHS criteria. Patient and operator satisfaction levels were assessed using a visual analogue scale (VAS) after restoration placement. A total of 37 patients and 47 restorations were included for further study. Four teeth were extracted—three due to extensive drug-induced secondary caries in the same patient, and one tooth due to large periapical periodontitis after 44 months of service. The overall survival rate was 91.4%, and success rate was 87.2%. Differences between baseline and endpoint scores were significant for marginal discoloration (p < 0.05) and adaptation (p < 0.001). Color match (p < 0.05) and surface texture (p < 0.001) differed significantly, affecting all restoration types. VAS scores for patient and operator satisfaction showed a significant rank correlation (p < 0.01), and pairwise comparison showed significant differences for mean overall patient and operator VAS scores (p < 0.001). Lava Ultimate CAD/CAM may be considered a suitable material for overlays and endocrown restorations when combined with IDS, air abrasion, and MDP-containing adhesive systems. Marginal disintegration may present in inlays and onlays over time.

Patient-reported experiences and preferences with intraoral scanners: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Intraoral scanners have become an increasingly popular alternative to conventional impression methods. Although their accuracy and validity have been examined thoroughly, patient-reported information including experiences, preferences, and satisfaction has not yet been investigated in a systematic way.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this systematic review is to investigate the available data and appraise the evidence on patient-reported experiences and preferences following impression taking with intraoral scanners.

SEARCH METHODS

Unrestricted search of seven databases (Pubmed, CENTRAL, Cochrane reviews, Scopus, Web of Science, Clinical Trials, and ProQuest) and grey literature were conducted until October 2020. Detailed search strategies were developed for each database.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies involving individuals of any gender or age, subjected to full arch impression taking with conventional and intraoral scanning methods were eligible for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Following the retrieval and selection of the studies, data extraction was performed. Risk of bias assessment was performed using the RoB 2 and ROBINS-I tools.

RESULTS

From the initially identified records, nine studies [eight crossover (two of them randomized) and one parallel group] were eventually included in the present systematic review. Randomized studies were shown, overall, to have some concerns regarding bias, whereas the non-randomized studies were found to be at serious risk, mainly because of bias due to confounding. All studies demonstrated some benefit in favour of intraoral scanning compared with conventional techniques. More positive feelings were generally observed with the intraoral scanners regarding smell, taste, sound, vibration, nausea, and queasiness. Overall, comfort assessment mostly favoured digital methods. No differences were found concerning the level of anxiety between the two methods. Among the included studies, time perception was a parameter leading to contradictory results.

LIMITATIONS

These emerge due to the nature and characteristics of the information retrieved from the included studies. The validation of the instruments to capture patient-reported outcomes needs to be further elaborated.

CONCLUSIONS

Intraoral scanners seem to be a promising new asset in the orthodontic office from the perspective of individuals' experiences and preferences. Nevertheless, to investigate patient-reported outcomes correctly, further high-quality studies are required in the future.

REGISTRATION

Open Science Framework (https://osf.io/ayug2/).

The dentist will scan you now: The next generation of digital-savvy graduates

INTRODUCTION

Undergraduate dental curriculum consisting of digital tools is essential in today's era of modern dentistry. The aim of this study was to evaluate final-year undergraduate dental students' perception of using intraoral scanners and the feasibility of increasing exposure to intraoral scanners in their undergraduate programme.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Forty students volunteered to complete one maxillary conventional and optical impression (TRIOS 3, 3Shape A/S). Questionnaires were used to assess their familiarity, perceived confidence levels, difficulties and user-friendliness of each technique using a visual analogue scale prior to and after experiencing each impression technique.

RESULTS

Students felt more familiar with conventional (C) than digital (D) impressions (P = .00). Their pre-confidence level was also higher with the conventional method (C: 80.9 ± 15.5; D: 39.6 ± 25.5); however, the post-confidence level significantly increased for the digital impression technique (P = .00). Participants perceived conventional technique to be easier (P = .02) and faster than optical impressions (P = .03). User-friendliness of the intraoral scanner scored moderate (67.7 ± 22.9). The difference in the mean total working time was not significant (P = .05). Forty per cent of participants indicated that they preferred using the digital impression technique.

CONCLUSIONS

Although final-year undergraduate students still perceived the conventional impression technique to be easier and faster than digital scanning, there was a significant increase in the level of confidence by this cohort after only one occasion of clinical optical impressions. Undergraduate dental students are ready to uptake new technology, and it should be strongly considered to incorporate more digital scanning during their training.

Effect of Impression Technique and Operator Experience on Impression Time and Operator-Reported Outcomes

PURPOSE

To investigate the effect of impression technique (conventional preliminary alginate and digital scan) and operator experience in impression making (experienced in digital and conventional, experienced in conventional and inexperienced in digital, and inexperienced in conventional and digital) on impression time, satisfaction and stress levels, and the preference of the operators.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

One patient was assigned for each of the 60 operators, who were experienced in impression techniques at different levels (Group 1: experienced in conventional and digital, Group 2: experienced in conventional and inexperienced in digital, Group 3: inexperienced in conventional and digital). They made conventional impressions (irreversible hydrocolloid) and digital scans (Trios 3) from the same patient. The impression times were recorded at each step (patient registration, maxillary arch, mandibular arch, and bite registration) and in total. A visual analog scale (VAS) was used for the operator satisfaction for applicability, comfort, and hygiene; the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory form (STAI-TX1) was used for stress, and a questionnaire was completed to measure the operator's impression preference. The data were analyzed with a 2-way ANOVA and Chi-square test (α = 0.05).

RESULTS

A significant interaction was found between the operator experience in impression making and the impression technique on time for maxillary and mandibular arch impressions and total time (p ≤ 0.002). Operator experience and impression technique interaction had a significant effect on comfort and average VAS scores (p ≤ 0.016). Whereas, no significant effect of this interaction was found on stress (p ≥ 0.195). Operator experience in impression making had a significant effect on applicability (p < 0.001), and the impression technique had a significant effect on hygiene VAS scores (p < 0.001). Operators in Group 1 and Group 3 preferred the digital scans, however, operators in Group 2 had no preference (p = 0.022).

CONCLUSION

Operator experience in impression making and impression technique had varying effects on clinician's impression time, comfort, applicability, hygiene, and preference. Operators needed less time for the impressions they were experienced with. Operator stress level was not affected by the operator experience in impression making and the impression technique. Dental students and operators experienced in both techniques were satisfied with the digital scans and they preferred digital scans. Operators experienced with conventional impressions were satisfied with conventional impressions but didn't have a preference for the impression type.

Operators matter - An assessment of the expectations, perceptions, and performance of dentists, postgraduate students, and dental prosthetist students using intraoral scanning

OBJECTIVE

to assess the expectations, perceptions and performance of different operators with varying backgrounds and training in the use of full-arch intraoral scanning (IOS).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Dentists (DENT), postgraduate dental students (DPG), and student prosthetists (PROS) were invited to join an IOS training workshop. Participants completed a satisfactory scan of a mannikin-mounted typodont with the total scanning time (TST) recorded. They also completed anonymised pre and post-training questionnaires covering their background, and IOS expectations and experience. Statistical analysis was performed using the Mann-Whitney U, Kruskal Wallis, and chi-square tests. Open-ended questions were analysed manually and using Leximancer.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven participants were recruited: 10 DENT; 10 PROS; and 7 DPG. Positive expectations of IOS was reported by 93 % of participants. Combined TST was 285 ± 83 s, with the PROS TST significantly longer (p < 0.05, 337 ± 79 s). Further training need was reported by 60 % of PROS and 50 % of DENT versus 14 % of DPG. Positive IOS experience was reported by 96 % of participants, 74 % perceived it to be accurate, and 63 % found it easy to use. Eighty-five percent of all participants stated that cost would influence their decision of adopting IOS in their practice.

CONCLUSION

Expectations and perceptions of IOS were overwhelmingly positive, irrespective of operator background and experience. Scanning performance and training needs depended on the operator's background. Cost of IOS remains a barrier to acquiring the technology.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

IOS training must be customised to accommodate the needs of different operators. The cost of IOS needs revision to improve its accessibility.

Measuring of Mandible Bone Density in Dogs Using /Digital Radiography/ Radiovisigraphy

Radiological diagnostics serves as one of the basic monitoring techniques in veterinary dental practice. The recent up-to-date literature data based on the findings of digital radiology/radiovisiography (RVG) in general dentistry inspired the authors to present its possible use in clinical veterinary dentistry. The digital radiography used in this study was RVG Trophy Radiologie SA 2001 device equipped with software for linear measurements (readings), densitometry, setting of contrast of radiography image, 3D image manipulation, zooming of detail and orientation handling. The aim of the study was to evaluate the bone mineral density of the alveolar part of the lower jaw in seven Scottish terriers. Bone mineral density measurement was performed around the central lower incisors by converting gray scale values into equivalent aluminum thickness (mm Al). The mean bone mineral density was in the range of 4.31-6.20 mm Al with no significant statistical difference between left and right incisors (p>0.01). Our results showed that the combination of RVG and aluminum step wedge etalon is a reliable tool to measure bone mineral density around the lower central incisors in dogs. This method can be considered as comfortable for manipulation in everyday use in clinical veterinary practice.

Digital Undergraduate Education in Dentistry: A Systematic Review

The aim of this systematic review was to investigate current penetration and educational quality enhancements from digitalization in the dental curriculum. Using a modified PICO strategy, the literature was searched using PubMed supplemented with a manual search to identify English-language articles published between 1994 and 2020 that reported the use of digital techniques in dental education. A total of 211 articles were identified by electronic search, of which 55 articles were selected for inclusion and supplemented with 27 additional publications retrieved by manual search, resulting in 82 studies that were included in the review. Publications were categorized into five areas of digital dental education: Web-based knowledge transfer and e-learning, digital surface mapping, dental simulator motor skills (including intraoral optical scanning), digital radiography, and surveys related to the penetration and acceptance of digital education. This review demonstrates that digitalization offers great potential to revolutionize dental education to help prepare future dentists for their daily practice. More interactive and intuitive e-learning possibilities will arise to stimulate an enjoyable and meaningful educational experience with 24/7 facilities. Augmented and virtual reality technology will likely play a dominant role in the future of dental education.